VINOD KUMAR SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-1(5), LUCKNOW-NEW
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2017-18.
The brief facts of the case are that the return of income for the captioned year was e-filed on 08.08.20218 declaring total income at Rs.6,72,346/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. The assessment was completed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’) at a total
2 ITA No. 377/Lkw/2023
income of Rs.30,93,631 /- as no response was forthcoming from the side of the assessee.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. First Appellate Authority. However, here again, in spite of numerous opportunities, as enumerated in the appellate order, no response was forthcoming from the side of the assessee and the assessee’s appeal came to be dismissed in limine by the ld. First Appellate Authority. 4. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the dismissal of his appeal by the CIT(A) by raising the following grounds of appeal:
“1 That the Income as per audited accounts filed should have been accepted. 2 That the appeal filed u/s 250 should have been accepted. 3 That without sending Notice physically on address the order passed u / s 144 by Learned AO was bad in law. 4 Learned Lower Court erred in confirming the addition made in the order passed U / s 144 ignoring the Audited final accounts. 5. That the Learned Assessing Officer erred in making addition of deposits made in the account of the wife of the appellant. 6 That the addition made is too excessive and arbitrary.
3 ITA No. 377/Lkw/2023
7 That the order passed is against the merit, circumstances and legal aspects of the case. 8 That the appellant seeks permission to modify and/or add any other ground or grounds of appeal as the circumstances of the case might require or justify.”
The ld. AR prayed that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to enable him to present his case before the Assessing Officer (AO).
The ld. D.R. had no objection to the restoration of appeal to the AO.
I have heard both the parties and have also perused the material on records. It is evident that there was complete non compliance on the part of the assessee during the course of first appellate proceedings. However, looking into the facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the AO with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case and I also caution the assessee to fully comply with the directions of the AO in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the AO shall be at complete
4 ITA No. 377/Lkw/2023
liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee.
In the final result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2024)
Sd/- (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Aks – Dtd. 29/04/2024
Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) Departmental Representative (5) Guard File
Assistant Registrar
